1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

Does Russia want a war between the West and Iran?

Discussion in 'Off-Topic' started by Winner, Sep 19, 2009.

  1. aronnax

    aronnax Let your spirit be free

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2007
    Messages:
    6,344
    Location:
    Air Temple Island
    Well that is because Iran is Russia's 7th largest trading partner. Their trade revenue has reached one billion. To cut off profits completely would be going against the same logic you are applying for the hypothetical Iran-USA War. Krelim probably prefered economic growth. At this point, you are thinking too much with.
     
  2. Princeps

    Princeps More bombs than God

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2004
    Messages:
    5,265
    If the Russians were to directly intervene through clandestine means, there is the strong possibility that such conspiracy would be revealed. Even diplomatic "steering" can pose risks: a regime might change, and with it, records could leak.

    Which means nothing.

    No it won't. Nobody is forcing Israel and the US to do anything.

    In a full scale war, the West would probably resort to regime change and elimination of Iran's military capability. Outright occupation might not unfold, but the government would nevertheless change. A regime change poses all sorts of threats, perhaps even the revelation of Russian involvement, whatever form it may take, as I said.

    While wars usually consolidate domestic power structures, defeat usually weakens them afterwards. Iran was rather recently in a bloody and bitter war with Iraq. I doubt that a regime which takes Iran into a bloody defeat and total economic ruin would remain standing for long. Again, I don't think the Iranian leadership is stupid. And I think they think the west isn't going to attack them over a nuclear program.

    Yes, I misread it. And now that you've clarified it, I think it's even more meaningless than I initially presumed. At least my presumption had exciting conspiracy touch to it.

    I don't believe that the "Iranian nuclear tensions" are going to lead to war even if the Iranians continue. And I doubt the Russian policy makers think so. The Bushies are out of power. So, further sanctions at best, but not really war. Unless the Russians were to directly intervene in some clandestine manne that provokes the US and its off-shore base called "Israel" to invade Iran.
     
  3. Winner

    Winner Diverse in Unity

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2004
    Messages:
    27,947
    Location:
    Brno -> Czech rep. >>European Union
    Actually it only supports my theory. If the war happens as planned, Iran will be even more dependent on Russia - so Russia will not only exert more influence, but the elimination of competition will make the cooperation even more profitable for Russia.

    Again, we're not talking about an all out war here, but a relatively small scale armed conflict. Iran will survive it and Russia will reap all the benefits.
     
  4. classical_hero

    classical_hero In whom I trust

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2003
    Messages:
    33,262
    Location:
    Perth,Western Australia
    Why are so many confusing what winner is saying? He never said that war between Russia and Iran, but only that Russia would do well out of a war between Iran and USA. How hard is that for many people to follow?
     
  5. aronnax

    aronnax Let your spirit be free

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2007
    Messages:
    6,344
    Location:
    Air Temple Island
    Well, Russia refusing to sanction Iran is not a complicated Global chess move in democracy. Its sensible. Why would I want to destroy the 7th most productive trade relation in my country? It is equivalent of the US, cutting off trade relations with South Korea, thats 5% of its trade.

    You assume the war will be a small contained conflict. A little shelling here and there from the coast, small skirmishes.

    No way. If something was serious enough to plunge Iran into a war with the US, its going to be all out (cept nukes). There will be bombing raids, there will be a land invasion from Iraq. If America does not take the initiative to strike after War is declared, what makes you think Iranian tanks are going to sit on the Iran-Iraq border and wait?


    Every body follows that... Who doesn't follow that? Isn't that the past 25 posts are talking about? An Iran-US war?
     
  6. Winner

    Winner Diverse in Unity

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2004
    Messages:
    27,947
    Location:
    Brno -> Czech rep. >>European Union
    What leak? That Iran received weapons from Russia? That's yesterday's news, nothing surprising. Russia would simply use the veto in the UN to prevent any sanctions, embolden Iran to continue developing it's nuclear program, and then wait until the West attacks. No risk, none at all.

    ASB, not going to happen and as I said 3 times already, there won't be any such war.

    That's what Russia wants them to think too :lol: See, you're starting to understand. Now try harder.

    Western strike against Iranian facilities would only boost the regime. Unlesthe US would resort to massive airstrikes against Iran, the country wouldn't be ruined. But it would definitely be even more resilient and determined to resist the West. Which is what Russia also wants :p

    Even if the US surrenders and let's Iran go nuclear, which would be its greatest geopolitical blunder since the Bay of Pigs, Russia still wins, even though not so much.

    There is really no risk for Russia in this strategy - it has realized that there is an opportunity to kill many birds with one stone, and now it's watching how the situation unfolds.

    The possibility of an Israeli strike is higher than low, no matter what you think.
     
  7. Sharwood

    Sharwood Rich, doctor nephew

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2008
    Messages:
    6,954
    Location:
    A little place outside Atlanta


    "Yes, that's what we wanted you to think!"
     
  8. amadeus

    amadeus Civ2 / Law and Order!

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2001
    Messages:
    35,631
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Osaka (大阪)
    Look at the charts: the U.S. invasion of Iraq did almost nothing to the price of oil, and while Iran may produce twice as much, it's still only about 5% of world production... it would not be difficult for countries not hostile to the United States to increase production to make up for that deficit. If Russia were to provoke a war between the "West" (the U.S., Britain, and who?) and Iran, it seems that Riyadh would be the economic victor.
     
  9. Rik Meleet

    Rik Meleet Top predator Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2003
    Messages:
    11,980
    Location:
    Nijmegen Netherlands
    Interesting theory; I'm going to think this through and find other sources.
    Thanks Winner.
     
  10. Thoughtful Thug

    Thoughtful Thug Deity

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2009
    Messages:
    2,340
    Location:
    ohi-yo
    The answer is yes and no.
     
  11. red_elk

    red_elk Deity

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2006
    Messages:
    13,997
  12. Kraznaya

    Kraznaya Princeps

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2005
    Messages:
    6,822
    Location:
    Land of the Successor
    They want it about as much as the West wants a war between Iran and Russia.
     
  13. Gelion

    Gelion Captain

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2004
    Messages:
    11,434
    Location:
    Earth Dome
  14. Zelig

    Zelig Beep Boop

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2002
    Messages:
    16,646
    Location:
    Canada
    I would be willing to appease Russia by returning all of the Soviet-era territory to her, to prevent a war.
     
  15. Gelion

    Gelion Captain

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2004
    Messages:
    11,434
    Location:
    Earth Dome
    The problem is, Russia doesn't need it ;)
     
  16. Winner

    Winner Diverse in Unity

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2004
    Messages:
    27,947
    Location:
    Brno -> Czech rep. >>European Union
    Iraq didn't threaten the oil transportation in the Persian Gulf, which is something Iran could easily do (not just because it is much better equipped for this, but also because of the length of its coast and the little fact it sits on top of the Strait of Hormuz). Look at the data I provided - such a disruption would seriously threaten world's oil supply.



    (Obviously, the length of the Iraqi coast isn't really comparable with Iran. it's a bit childish comparison, but look at what a bunch of poorly organized Somali pirates can do in open seas near the Horn of Africa. I think the Iranians would be much more effective in harassing oil transportation)
     
  17. Winner

    Winner Diverse in Unity

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2004
    Messages:
    27,947
    Location:
    Brno -> Czech rep. >>European Union
    Eh, foreign currency reserves are totally irrelevant :p We're talking about annual inflow of oil money into the Russian budget. See that I am not saying Russia will go bankrupt, but in case the prices of natural gas and oil remain low, Russia will have to reduce spending and it won't be able to proceed with the ambitious plans for military reforms and rearmament. Even greater risk is that Kremlin would have to reduce other spending at home and increase taxes, which would hit the people who's support is crucial.

    It's not life or death situation, but (and I said that many times) an opportunity which is worth taking. If the strategy fails, then Russia won't suffer any consequences which it wouldn't suffer in any case, but if the strategy succeeds, then Russia gains a lot - more money in the budget, more money for the people and the military. The current political establishment will be boosted, there will be more money for the military and Russia will gain a lot of influence in the Middle East.
     
  18. Shekwan

    Shekwan Kim Chi Quaffing Celt

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2006
    Messages:
    5,782
    Location:
    South Korea
    Well thought out post, interesting read.
     
  19. Yeekim

    Yeekim Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2006
    Messages:
    10,630
    Location:
    Estonia
    It is plain as day Russia would benefit from such a conflict, both because change in oil prices and because it would be costly to US and keep its hands full, so Russia would likely get more leeway whereever they might need it.
    They are also actively baring sanctions against Iran through their position in UN Security Council - a long known fact.
    They need to do nothing else for a pretty good chance hostilities will eventually break out

    So what is here to argue about? The only disputable thing is whether US/Israel will really strike or not. If not, Iran shall most likely get their nukes. Serious prestige loss and headache for US.
    Win-win situation for Kremlin.

    EDIT: And, for the record, I do not think it makes Russia "evil" per se. It merely shows they are not willing to share common goals with US or EU... again something that is not exactly news. Though you might think it is. Has someone mentioned "lol, Cold War is over you Russophobes!" in this thread already?
     
  20. red_elk

    red_elk Deity

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2006
    Messages:
    13,997
    Then, your link about reserve fund emptying fast is irrelevant. Reserve fund is only a small part of CBR currency reserves, which are slightly growing last few months.

    Last time when Russia had serious troubles with budget deficit, oil price was ~5-7 times lower than current one. So, let's hope it will remain "low".

    It could be profitable for Russia only if Iran could withstand NATO attack. In reality, increase of oil prices would most likely be very short-term effect, like for a few months. And in long term we'll get new neighboring American puppet. What is currently profitable for Russia is maintaining balance of power in the world, which means reducing overexpanded American influence.
     

Share This Page